Would you be okay with state or state-backed ownership?

  • Based on the club's statement regarding Mason Greenwood, the site's current policy will continue until further clarity about the player's future is known.

    So to reiterate, all discussions about Mason Greenwood remain off limits.

Woodzy

Full Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Messages
12,985
Location
Cardiff
There’s not much we can do about it as fans so may as well accept it.

Something needs to be done about it, but it needs to be done at top level that will affect all clubs and we are too far gone for that at this point. State backed clubs are a thing now, accept it or accept not being able to compete, especially when more and more clubs come under this sort of ownership.
 

Pogue Mahone

Poster of the year 2008 & 2020
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
122,451
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Being ok with it can only involve admitting to being a massive hypocrite for anyone who ever slagged off another club for being an “oil club” or buying success with money they didn’t earn. I might start a thread for everyone to line up and confess. It will surely reach at least 20 pages.
 

Lord Zlatan

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
606
Location
Ireland
No. Ideally we want someone rich enough to buy the club, clear the debts and redevelop the stadium. United will thrive then if the correct people are in place whose only remit is football not sponsorship teals with goodyear tyres or something.

They should understand and love football and the ethos of the club. That rules out Americans and for me oil states. Should be British owned or even European.
 

pratyush_utd

Full Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
7,355
We already generate a huge amount of money. Dont need fake sponsor. So our success would not be funded as City and PSG success has been.

I would still be disappointed as they will use the name but we already a behemoth in football financial terms and dont need cooking of our books. That was my main point against oil clubs.
 

Cal?

CR7 fan
Joined
Mar 18, 2002
Messages
34,720
Nah, it's become solid red, California on the other hand... :drool:

Seriously though, Norway would be great, Singapore too probably, not so much the oil states
 

Someone

Something
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Messages
6,776
Location
Somewhere
No for 2 reasons:
  1. Having endless cash would ruin success for me the same way using a cheat code means nothing when you play a game. Part of the joy of winning is how hard it is and how many things need to go right.
  2. Some of those states are run by horrific regimes. It's not just the lack of human rights that some might argue just about having different values. What the Saudis are doing in Yemen for example is appalling, I can't wake up everyday knowing that our club is trying to make them look good.
But let's say for example that the Norwegian wealth fund was used to buy United, then it's a bit different, because they know it will be for the aim of investment and no endless cash, and no current record of human rights violations, but I doubt they'd be interested.
 

lsd

The Oracle
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
9,312
I wouldn't like it and have actively despised what has happened to football with money from these human rights abusers.

Hopefully it won't happen us and someone else but not feckin apple cone in instead
 

Orange Tree

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
1,449
I'll be very disappointed. I don't know if I would want to support the team after that.
 

wangyu

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2022
Messages
662
There is enough controvery surrounding a club like Utd. I could do without the club becoming the center of hate around football fans all over the world. So no thanks to State ownerships.
 

BD

technologically challenged
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
20,539
Nah. Even an 'acceptable' country like Norway wouldn't be right. We don't need that money, and it ruins the game. Has already ruined it, but at least we can claim to be apart from it.
 

Guapa

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
519
No.
 

Will Singh

Full Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
5,648
Location
Theatre of dreams
This is getting boring, can we move the stadium to a country that doesn’t sell arms to countries that are dropping bombs on innocent women and children l?
 

Maluco

Last Man Standing 3 champion 2019/20
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
4,284
I wouldn't like it. Any state that might buy us would be a shite oil state. And with unlimited money any victory would be hollow.

No one really cares about City's trophies because everyone knows it is just because of unlimited money.
This. It would be the end of the line for me. Soulless and hollow with no real meaning to any trophies, just like our neighbors.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
4,997
Location
DKNY
No. Absolutely not. A thousand times not. I detest these perfidous sports washing projects with every bit of my soul.

Private ownership thank you. I want us to keep our soul. We can do that with a private owner, not a state one with all that this entails.
 

SamVimes

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 30, 2015
Messages
954
Location
Dublin
Nope, no matter which State it is, and that includes Norway.

It should be a privately run organisation or company.
 

TheNewEra

Knows Kroos' mentality
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
7,524
This. It would be the end of the line for me. Soulless and hollow with no real meaning to any trophies, just like our neighbors.
United have a rich history though, and a big loyal fanbase.

Having a state come in wouldn't change that, it would give United a good hierachy, completely modernising and they'd want results on the field.

They will make sure the club is sucessful. The question with United now isn't the fans or the history it's the owners.

Having more American owners IMO means United just won't get the investment it needs.

I think getting another investment group or more bankers mean they want to turn a profit on United and that's it. We want owners that will pour money in.

Having the likes of Dubai would be great for United, Dubai is the hub of the world for Tourists, people do layovers there, Dubai mall is the biggest mall in the world they could literally have a megastore there.

You'd have billions of tourists each year it's free advertising for United.
 

glazed

Eats diamonds to beat thermodynamics
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
6,078
I guess in the end I will just ignore it. But then I don't give a penny to the club and haven't for a long time, directly or indirectly. If I felt I was contributing to one of those regimes financially it would be very different.
 

TheNewEra

Knows Kroos' mentality
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
7,524
Nope, no matter which State it is, and that includes Norway.

It should be a privately run organisation or company.
I love the sentiment if this was the early 2000s, times have changed
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
6,593
If this was a question asked in 2005 it’d be a firm no.

But the landscape has changed significantly now - your choices are either;

a) state backed
b) American hypercapitalist
c) megacorp backed (eg Red Bull, Bayer Leverkusen etc).

The years of these clubs having local affiliation is long gone. That’s the ideal but it’s not going to happen, and it’s unlikely someone or some local business will be able to purchase a PL team.

We’ve been the plaything of b) for so long that I genuinely think they’re the worst option. It’s why I have little issue with a) now. It’s vulture-like hypercapitalist profiteering vs sportswashing.

C) is an option but they tend to work well in countries like Germany where there is mandated fan ownership.
 

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
22,662
There’s not much we can do about it as fans so may as well accept it.

Something needs to be done about it, but it needs to be done at top level that will affect all clubs and we are too far gone for that at this point. State backed clubs are a thing now, accept it or accept not being able to compete, especially when more and more clubs come under this sort of ownership.
Yeah feel exactly that way,let's face it chances are the big tech giants aren't genuinely interested. Like I said earlier a happy medium would be Amancio Ortega.
 

Maluco

Last Man Standing 3 champion 2019/20
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
4,284
United have a rich history though, and a big loyal fanbase.

Having a state come in wouldn't change that, it would give United a good hierachy, completely modernising and they'd want results on the field.

They will make sure the club is sucessful. The question with United now isn't the fans or the history it's the owners.

Having more American owners IMO means United just won't get the investment it needs.

I think getting another investment group or more bankers mean they want to turn a profit on United and that's it. We want owners that will pour money in.

Having the likes of Dubai would be great for United, Dubai is the hub of the world for Tourists, people do layovers there, Dubai mall is the biggest mall in the world they could literally have a megastore there.

You'd have billions of tourists each year it's free advertising for United.
There has to be a cut off at some point. Private investment is unavoidable but there would be no joy watching a team with unlimited finances trample those around them.

The history would be sold.
 

Jev

Full Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
6,749
Location
Denmark
No. If we were bought by the Saudis I would stop following United.
 

JJ12

Predicted Portugal, Italy to win Euro 2016, 2020
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
9,777
Location
Wales
People who say they’d stop supporting just because we are owned by corrupt, murderous states baffle me.
 

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
22,662
Safe to say much like when Glazers took over in 2005 we will be losing some fans again
 
X